]]>By: Logic: another form of female oppressionhttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-586197
Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:30:11 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-586197[…] July, 2013, The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies published an article called Myths about rape myths by Helen Reece, Reader at Law. The paper was soon followed by a debate called “Is Rape […]
]]>By: Is rape different? | Diana Davisonhttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-549350
Tue, 31 Dec 2013 06:37:17 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-549350[…] Helen Reece is attempting to bring attention. The rape myth surveys that she de-constructed in her initial article were all peer reviewed. That such shoddy academic work can not only pass peer review but become […]
]]>By: The myth of rape myths | Diana Davisonhttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-549346
Tue, 31 Dec 2013 06:26:01 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-549346[…] July, 2013, the Oxford Journal of Legal Studies published a summary article of Helen Reece’s paper entitled “Rape Myths: Is Elite Opinion Right and Popular Opinion […]
]]>By: Is rape different?http://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-523447
Fri, 22 Nov 2013 14:11:20 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-523447[…] Helen Reece is attempting to bring attention. The rape myth surveys that she de-constructed in her initial article were all peer reviewed. That such shoddy academic work can not only pass peer review but become […]
]]>By: The myth of rape mythshttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-520657
Sat, 16 Nov 2013 12:51:50 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-520657[…] July, 2013, the Oxford Journal of Legal Studies published a summary article of Helen Reece’s paper entitled “Rape Myths: Is Elite Opinion Right and Popular Opinion […]
]]>By: Barbarahttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-476593
Tue, 06 Aug 2013 13:59:44 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-476593Reece’s critique of rape myths research disregards a large body of psychological evidence showing that many rape myths are, in fact, false beliefs that can be refuted on the basis of empirical research.

Her attack on established and psychometrically sound measures of rape myth acceptance and on research linking these measures to perceptions of victim and perpetrator blame is made without an understanding of the basic principles of reliability and validity in psychological measurement. Therefore, her claim that there is little evidence that rape myths play a role in low conviction rates for rape must be rejected on the basis of the available evidence.

2) Doesn’t make sense and wasn’t a useful thing to say. While I’m here, calling things “myth myths” is just pointlessly confusing.

3) “Does it mean that people believe ‘real rape’ is the only sort of rape, the most common sort of rape, or the most serious type of rape?”

Yes to all of the above, and five minutes of research would have answered this “question” for you. Public figures frequently talk about “real rape” or “rape rape” as though there is or ought to be a legal difference between “violent stranger rape” and “supposed friend with threat of violence rape”.
I suggest you research articles before publishing. It might help you.

4) “There isn’t good evidence that people are less believing of rape complainants than other complainants.”

You mean apart from the hosts of people that come out to support the accused (without evidence) in every high profile rape case? Or the prevalence of the “it was consensual” defence, which wouldn’t work if people believed the complainants? Or the treatment rape victims get when they do report, and which they frequently write about?

If rape victims telling you that they were not believed is not good evidence, then perhaps you should push for research that you will consider good evidence, rather than calling them liars?

5) People show consent through saying “Yes I would like to have sex with you”, or some variant thereof. Nothing else is consent because that’s what consent is.

6) What someone wears is not relevant to consent. Clothing is not consent. Even if clothing constitutes an invitation to be approached, it doesn’t constitute consent. If you wear a nice dress because you’re on the pull that doesn’t mean you said yes to everyone. And it doesn’t mean you said yes to your rapist.

7) See 6). The usual things that come up in rape cases – clothes, activity, sexual history – none of them are actually relevant to whether the victim said yes at the time. So why do they come up? Because people are trying to blame the victims.

Anecdotally, have you ever heard anyone say “Well she was asking for it, going out like that” about a rape case. I have. Everyone I know has. It’s a common trope. And it is blaming the victim. But strangely enough you don’t hear it in criminal assault cases.

As for the amnesty survery, naturally people don’t acknowledge their blaming habits when asked directly. They also don’t generally examine their actions to check whether their victim-blaming is a subconscious response either.

]]>By: A. Loweryhttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-474462
Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:26:34 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-474462Once again the main problem has been conveniently ignored………CASH for CLAIMS equals massive false allegations ……further prostituting actual rape figures which are already being massaged according to viewpoints by interested parties.
STOP paying cash compensation to everyone who see’s a quick buck to be made and provide a more efficient and beneficial means to assist actual victims and we will then get accurate sex offence figures and be more ably equipped to help victims and punish/control the real perpetrators. CASH for claims equals corruption, you cannot compensate for the real crime of rape or sex offence with cash.
]]>By: Chrishttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-474380
Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:21:02 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-474380While Brendan makes a good point about citing your sources when speaking about such a controversial matter (or even if it’s not – massive injustices can slip by if politically correct) the conclusion he leaps to – dismissing the assertions out-of-hand – is just as hazardous.

A “social attitude that makes it easy for rapists to get away with their crimes” huh? I see due process. Or, the principle that will let a potential perp go if there’s reasonable doubt on how things actually happened. This should apply both to potential rapists and potential false accusers. But, more and more often (don’t take my word for it, check out places like A Voice for Men and the YouTube channels “girlwriteswhat” and “manwomanmyth” that talk about this far better than I ever could) this is being subverted so hard that the accusation itself (when, and ONLY when being wielded by a woman against a man) is an effective weapon of coersion.

I could go further, but as I said, my sources are far better at this whole “gender equality statistics” thing than me.

]]>By: Brendanhttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-474298
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:56:05 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-474298If you want to argue in favour of thoroughly debunked rape myths you should try bringing research to the table that supports your position. All your current argument boils down to is “The results of decades of research into the social and legal causes and effects of rape don’t fit into my world view, so, rather than accepting the possibility that my world view is wrong, I instead refuse to accept the validity of the evidence.” If the closest you can come to for a supporting argument is a comparison to the conviction rates of burglary cases (a crime which is, for the most part, committed anonymously, making it notoriously difficult to identify perpetrators) and rape cases (a crime in which the majority of attackers are known to their victim) then you really need to stop speaking on this subject and start listening. Until you do that all you’re doing is perpetuating a social attitude that makes it easy for rapists to get away with their crimes.
]]>By: Sarahhttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-474271
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:28:36 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-474271Scott, I have been frustrated with the US playing the “semantics game”! Whenever the population rises up against a current policy, that just change the terms or words, to make it more palatable! Notice the “absolute” words in gwallan and Serena’s posts: “wrong on EVERY point”. “They’re ALL flawed” “all” “everywhere else”, and the name calling…”wrong….every point” disingenuous” “ignorant” “flimsy” “rubbish” “harmful”.

These words intentionally try to suppress legitimate, intelligent discussion on this matter! As you wrote : “This manufactured statistic inflames a jury prejudice against any guy facing a false rape accusation, and may very well be unconstitutional.” My son is in prison, in a horrible state, for a rape he did not commit, because of these overt semantics game playing. Mostly to avoid taking responsibility, I believe!

]]>By: gwallanhttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-474165
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:47:24 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-474165The biggest rape myth of all is perpetuated here just as it is everywhere else.
]]>By: Scotthttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-474118
Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:18:19 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-474118In the US, law enforcement are now using protocol perversions and semantics games to manufacture the untruth that only 2% of rape accusations are false, when in reality its much higher. This manufactured statistic Inflames a jury prejudice against any guy facing a false rape accusation, and may very well be unconstitutional.
]]>By: Serenahttp://blog.oup.com/2013/07/myths-about-rape-myths/#comment-474078
Mon, 22 Jul 2013 21:22:48 +0000http://blog.oup.com/?p=46285#comment-474078Oh dear. What is this woman trying to achieve? She is woefully mis-stating just about every rape myth there is, and forming each one very neatly into a straw man.

This article is so wrong on every point, she is either being grossly disingenuous, or just unbelievably ignorant.

I don’t have the energy to pick her up on every argument (they’re all flawed), but I do wonder, what is this esteemed journal doing publishing such flimsy, wrong, and harmful rubbish?